MDAPlatform: A Component-based Platform for Constructing and Assessing miRNA-disease Association Prediction Methods
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Increasing evidence has indicated that miRNA-disease association prediction plays a critical role in the study of clinical drugs. Researchers have proposed many computational models for miRNA-disease prediction. However, there is no unified platform to compare and analyze the pros and cons or share the code and data of these models. Objective: In this study, we develop an easy-to-use platform (MDAPlatform) to construct and assess miRNA-disease association prediction method. Methods: MDAPlatform integrates the relevant data of miRNA, disease and miRNA-disease associations that are used in previous miRNA-disease association prediction studies. Based on the componentized model, it develops different components of previous computational methods. Results: Users can conduct cross validation experiments and compare their methods with other methods, and the visualized comparison results are also provided. Conclusion: Based on the componentized model, MDAPlatform provides easy-to-operate interfaces to construct the miRNA-disease association method, which is beneficial to develop new miRNA-disease association prediction methods in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it